New Zealand Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Burglary sentencing

Legal area

Court

22 Dec 2020

VALE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 3520

Citation

[2020] NZHC 3520
Court

High Court

The District Court mixed Senior and Taueki approaches and thereby risked double counting Mr Vale's criminal history; treating the index offending in isolation warranted a nine month starting point, a three month uplift for prior burglaries, and a 40% mitigation discount (including guilty plea), resulting in an appropriate substituted sentence of eight months' imprisonment; judges must avoid factoring criminal history more than once and must account for mental illness and poverty as mitigation where applicable.
20 Mar 2018

RIGBY v R [2018] NZHC 478

Citation

[2018] NZHC 478
Court

High Court

The District Court starting point of two years seven months was slightly high; an appropriate starting point is two years four months. Adjustments made by the District Court were largely appropriate (one month EM bail credit, other uplifts and discounts), but the High Court allowed a further two‑month reduction recognising demonstrable prospects of rehabilitation identified in the s 38 psychiatric report. The appeal is allowed in part and the sentence is reduced to 22 months' imprisonment; leave is granted under s 80I to apply for substitution by home detention if a suitable residence becomes…
13 Mar 2017

HANSEN v POLICE [2017] NZHC 425

Citation

[2017] NZHC 425
Court

High Court

The appellate court held the 10 month sentence was at the higher end of the appropriate range but not manifestly excessive; the District Court did not make a material error in sentencing because it properly considered aggravating and mitigating factors, prior breaches and the unavailability of suitable home detention, and thus imprisonment was justified.

New Zealand Case Law

VALE v NEW ZEALAND POLICE [2020] NZHC 3520

RIGBY v R [2018] NZHC 478

HANSEN v POLICE [2017] NZHC 425